Category Archives: Middle East

Obama Trump Spying Scandal | Why Obama Must Testify | Mar 22, 2017

| Spectator.org

Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking

WASHINGTON — In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.…

Mr. President: Is this report by the New York Times accurate? Sir, did officials in your White House ever “spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government”?

As the House and Senate investigations start up, with the House Intelligence Committee hearing from FBI Director James Comey today, there is someone missing from the witness list.

That would be: Former President Barack Obama.

There is one person — and one person alone — who can begin to sort all of this out: Former President Obama. He should be called to testify post haste. Here are a sample of the questions for any interested member of Congress or the Senate.

1. Your administration surveilled the e-mails of Fox reporter James Rosen, tried to force New York Times reporter James Risen to testify on his sources  for a book on the CIA. Mr. Risen went so far as to say you were the “Greatest Enemy To Press Freedom In A Generation.” Understanding these facts, why should Americans not believe that your administration used surveillance capabilities on President Trump’s associates or even the President himself? And can you categorically deny that reporting by John Solomon and Sara Carter of circa.com of an investigation by your government into a Trump server  is false?

2. Do you read the New York Times and the Washington Post? Did your White House Communications staff read the Times and the Post and did they supply you with the news of stories as presented by those papers

3. Did you read the New York Times on January 12th of this year? January 19th of this year? January 20th? February 9th? March 1st? Did you read the Washington Post on March 2nd?

4. Were you aware at any time that the news media was reporting multiple stories that your administration had leaked surveillance of anyone connected to the Trump campaign, Trump businesses or other Trump-related activity? If not, why not?

5. The New York Times headlined and reported on March 1st:

Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking

WASHINGTON — In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.…

Mr. President: Is this report by the New York Times accurate? Sir, did officials in your White House ever “spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government”?

6. Mr. President, at any time did officials of your government seek to “leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” … intelligence that reported on anyone connected to then candidate or president-elect Donald Trump, his campaign, his businesses or any other Trump-related enterprise?

7. Mr. President, are you willing to voluntarily turn over all papers or electronic communications and phone records of your White House and the larger government then-under your supervision that this committee deems relevant to its investigation?

8. Sir, did your administration surveil in any fashion — electronic, wireless, in-person or otherwise — the activities of Attorney General Jefferson Sessions when he was a sitting United States Senator?

9. Were you or anyone in your White House ever aware that, as per the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, the “FBI, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and Treasury Department” were conducting a “wide-ranging U.S. counterintelligence investigation into possible communications between members of Mr. Trump’s campaign team and Russian operatives.”

10. Mr. President, if the answer to that last question is no — can you explain why the New York Times would report on March 1st that — and I quote:

“In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.…”

Sir? Respectfully? If this report from the Times is true, does this mean you were uninformed of what went on in your own White House?”

….Continue reading more @ Spectator.org

 

Hawaii Obama Judge Rules Muslim Imam Has Special Constitutional Rights to Bring Anyone from Terror Countries into America

|  Breitbart

“In a ruling issued on Wednesday afternoon, a federal judge, and Obama appointee, prevented the President of the United States from enforcing his own executive order to protect the nation from migrants from terror-riddled countries.

The judge then prevented every other judge and every other state from following the President’s order, the judge making himself a one-man Supreme Court and substitute President.

Attorney Robert Barnes joined SiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Thursday’s Breitbart News Daily to discuss his latest Breitbart News column:

“The Hawaii judge’s decision says he has a First Amendment constitutional right to do so because he’s Muslim. It was one of the most extraordinary interpretations of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment ever given, which is that because these are Muslim countries that were banned where the issue of terror arises from that that meant they had a special right to access the country and visit the country,” he said.

“As long as there is somebody here that wants them here, no president can ever preclude them from coming here. He basically gave First Amendment rights to everybody around the world and gave special preferences to people who are Muslim under his interpretation of the First Amendment,” Barnes summarized.

Barnes noted that the judge did not “cite any prior decision” that has ever established this astonishing new quirk of the Constitution.”

…Continue reading more @ Breitbart

 

FOUR dead – including a policeman and a woman – 20 injured as ‘two terrorists’ mow down people on Westminster Bridge before one is shot dead attacking police inside Parliament gates

| DailyMail UK

Three people and a terrorist are dead after an attacker brought carnage to central London today, mowing down pedestrians on Westminster Bridge and hacking at police with knives in the grounds of the Houses of Parliament.

Around 20 people were hit when a 4×4 drove along the pavement on the crowded bridge, knocking down and seriously injuring pedestrians before crashing into a fence below Big Ben.

The killer, described by witnesses as ‘middle-aged and Asian’, then managed to break into the grounds of Parliament, where he fatally stabbed a police officer with two knives.

The policeman died at the scene. The attacker – who was shot at least twice by armed officers guarding the building – died after he was taken to hospital.

Prime Minister Theresa May tonight vowed Britain would ‘never give in to terror’ and ‘defeat hate and evil’ after she blasted the ‘sick and depraved’ attack in Westminster.

She added the ‘forces of evil would never drive Britain apart’ and praised police and security staff who ‘ran towards danger even as they encouraged others to move away’.

It is currently believed he was the only ‘lone wolf’ attacker. Around 20 pedestrians and three other police officers were injured.

Prime Minister Theresa May was bundled into her car by a plain-clothes police officer and driven quickly from the scene as the attack unfolded. She chaired a meeting of the Government’s emergency Cobra Committee tonight.

Scotland Yard said the attack, which comes a year to the day after the atrocities in Brussels, is being treated ‘as a terrorist incident’.

….Continue reading @ Daily Mail UK

 

Critical Defense Data Theft at House Democratic Intelligence Committees By Three Pakistani Muslim Brothers

| Youtube

More here @ Youtube

 

My Hometown Fanatics: Stacey Dooley Investigates Muslim Extremists in UK

– Youtube

Stacey Dooley is an amazing filmmaker. In this documentary she goes back to her hometown of Luton, a suburb of London after just four years away.

 

 

‘Holy Wars Will Soon Begin in Europe’ | Mar 17, 2017

Turkish Foreign Minister Çavuşoğlu: ‘Holy Wars Will Soon Begin in Europe’

|  theGatewayPundit

“In one of the first reactions from Ankara to the Dutch election result, Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, warned that Europe was heading towards the abyss and that ‘holy wars’ would soon begin on the continent – this coming despite the fact that nationalist Geert Wilders, a vocal critic of Islam, was pushed into second place by the center right Prime Minister, Mark Rutte.

 

Çavuşoğlu, who has been addressing Turkish crowds across Europe ahead of a constitutional referendum in Turkey next month, was refused permission to land in Holland for a campaign rally on Saturday, sparking a heated diplomatic row and street protests which dominated the final days of the Dutch election campaign.

The dramatic war of words, which saw Ankara accuse the Dutch government of ‘fascism’ and of being a ‘Nazi remnant’, has grown in recent days to include other Western European nations which have restricted Turkish political rallies on their soil, most notably Austria and Germany, but also Denmark and Switzerland.

Recent months have seen mass demonstrations and rallies, with seas of red ‘star and crescent’ flags greeting Turkish ministers campaigning in Europe on behalf of their government’s referendum proposal. The sheer size of some rallies has caused unease, highlighting the scale of Europe’s burgeoning foreign populations and offering a glimpse of the continent’s demographic future.

Of the millions of Turks living in Europe, some five million – many of them dual citizens – are eligible to vote in the referendum, set for April 16th, which seeks to significantly increase the powers of authoritarian Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Speaking at a rally east of Istanbul just hours after his foreign minister’s controversial comments, Erdoğan accused the EU of launching an anti-Islamic ‘crusade’ between the Christian cross and the Muslim crescent, referring to Tuesday’s ruling by the EU Court of Justice which would allow employers to prohibit political and religious symbols in the workplace, including the wearing of the Islamic veil.

‘They have commenced a struggle between the cross and crescent. There is no other explanation than this. I am saying this clearly – Europe is heading toward the days just before World War II,’ Erdoğan stated in combative tone.

Following on from comments by his foreign minister earlier this week, Erdoğan again threatened to end the year-old migrant deal signed between the EU and Turkey, which could see millions of migrants flood into Europe from Turkey via Greece and Bulgaria.

Of some six million migrants seeking to enter Europe from countries surrounding the Mediterranean, an estimated three million are currently waiting in Turkey, according to a leaked German intelligence report published last month, a figure Erdoğan is fond of raising in negotiations with the EU.”

….Continue reading @ theGatewayPundit

 

Law |

Campaign Pledges Haunt Trump in Court

| New York Times

Outside the context of Mr. Trump’s two travel bans, few judicial rulings have addressed how much weight courts may put on statements from political candidates. Even informal remarks from sitting government officials are often ignored by courts, which can be reluctant to conduct what the Supreme Court has called “judicial psychoanalysis.”

“In quick succession on Wednesday night, federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland blocked President Trump’s revised travel ban. They said statements Mr. Trump had made as a presidential candidate, including his call for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” helped doom the executive order.

The judges said Mr. Trump’s promises to impose a “Muslim ban” were too telling and categorical to be ignored. “Simply because a decision maker made the statements during a campaign does not wipe them” from judicial memory, wrote Judge Theodore D. Chuang of Federal District Court in Maryland.

Outside the context of Mr. Trump’s two travel bans, few judicial rulings have addressed how much weight courts may put on statements from political candidates. Even informal remarks from sitting government officials are often ignored by courts, which can be reluctant to conduct what the Supreme Court has called “judicial psychoanalysis.”

But decisions about religious discrimination allow courts to consider government officials’ real purposes, even if their stated ones are neutral.

The Supreme Court has said judges may not turn a blind eye to the context in which government policies on religion arose. “Reasonable observers have reasonable memories,” Justice David H. Souter wrote in a leading religion case.

Justice Department lawyers had urged the judges to ignore Mr. Trump’s speeches on the campaign trail. “Candidates are not government actors, and statements of what they might attempt to achieve if elected, which are often simplified and imprecise, are not official acts,” the government said in a brief in the Maryland case. “They generally are made without the benefit of advice from an as-yet-unformed administration, and cannot bind elected officials who later conclude that a different course is warranted.”

The courts had to navigate two bodies of precedents, pointing in different directions. In cases concerning immigration and national security, most decisions suggest that courts should not look behind the stated government rationale.

Courts have only rarely used statements from candidates to judge the constitutionality of government actions. In 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, took account of campaign materials from Chief Justice Roy S. Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court to judge his actions concerning a Ten Commandments monument in his courthouse.

In the context of immigration and efforts to combat terror, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to look behind official actions to root out authentic motives. In 2006, in a case concerning detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Justice John Paul Stevens criticized a dissenting justice for relying on “press statements” from sitting Defense Department officials. “We have not heretofore, in evaluating the legality of executive action, deferred to comments made by such officials to the media,” Justice Stevens wrote. If even statements from government officials are out of bounds, it would follow that statement from political candidates should carry no weight.

In a 1972 immigration case concerning a Marxist scholar denied a visa, the Supreme Court similarly said it would not “look behind” the government’s “facially legitimate and bona fide reason.”

….Continue reading more @ NY Times

Muslim Migrants Benefit from Sweden’s Stockholm Syndrome | Feb 20, 2017

Ami Horowitz |  ‘Full Disclosure’

– Youtube

 

More @ Youtube

– Note: The Swedish migration policy is based on the French example. /CJ

 

‘Cologne is every day’: Europe’s rape epidemic

– News.com.au

 

“GERMANY, Sweden and other European countries are facing growing public unrest amid a wave of reports of sexual assaults since the Cologne attacks.

New York-based conservative think tank Gatestone Institute has compiled a shocking list of sexual assaults and rapes by migrants in Germany in just the first two months of the year.

Drawing only from German media reports, the list documents more than 160 instances of rape and sexual assault committed by migrants in train stations, swimming pools and other public places against victims as young as seven.

German police use terms such as “southerners” (südländer), men with “dark skin” (dunkelhäutig, dunklere gesichtsfarbe, dunklem hauttyp) or “southern skin colour” (südländische hautfarbe) to describe the alleged perpetrators.

Authorities across the country have been accused of downplaying the true extent of the problem by suppressing information about migrant-related crimes, ostensibly due to a “lack of public interest”.

Police are also wary of fuelling civil unrest amid a rising number of attacks on migrants and shelters by right-wing vigilante groups. In response, Germans are increasingly turning to social media to spread information.

A German Twitter account, @XYEinzelfall (“individual cases”), has created a Google map to track police reports of crimes allegedly committed by migrants across the region. “Cologne was just the tip of the iceberg,” the page says. “Cologne is every day.”

Most recently, three girls aged 15, 16 and 17 were assaulted over two hours by a mob of up to 30 migrants at a shopping centre in the northern city of Kiel.

Since the attack, which began when two Afghan men began stalking the teenagers and sharing photos on social media, other women have come forward to report similar experiences.

“Groups of young men gather at the Sophienhof [shopping centre] every evening,” a restaurant owner told the Kieler Nachrichten newspaper.

“What they do here is unacceptable. The moment they see a young woman wearing a skirt or any type of loose clothing, they believe they have a free pass. It is about time migrants are made to understand: things in Germany function differently than in their home countries.”

However, refugee advocates have warned against tarring all migrants with the same brush, noting that the alleged crimes are rare incidents in the context of the enormous number of migrants who have come to Europe.

More than 1.1 million migrants flooded into Germany in 2015 and the country is expecting 3.6 million to arrive by 2020, according to internal government estimates.”

….Continue reading @ News.au.com

 

“Allahu Ackbar” on the streets of New York City

– Youtube

“I am a Muslim too” anti-Trump rally in New York City

 

 

‘ISLAMIZATION’ OF PARIS A WARNING TO THE WEST | JULY 2016

Muslims take over streets as Islamization Grows in France

– CBN

More @ Youtube

 

How Sweden became an example of how not to handle immigration

– Spectator UK

“For a British boy to be killed by a grenade attack anywhere is appalling, but for it to happen in a suburb of Gothenburg should shatter a few illusions about Sweden. Last week’s murder of eight-year-old Yuusuf Warsame fits a pattern that Swedes have come slowly to recognise over the years. He was from Birmingham, visiting relatives, and was caught up in what Swedish police believe is a gang war within the Somali community. Last year, a four-year-old girl was killed by a car bomb outside Gothenburg, another apparent victim of gang violence.”

….Continue reading more @ Spectator UK

 

Tucker Carlson speaks out on Trump’s ‘Sweden’ remark

– Youtube | Fox & Friends

More @ Youtube

 

Rasmussen Says 57% of Likely U.S. Voters Support a Temporary Ban on Refugees | Jan 30, 2107

Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens

– Rasmussen Reports

“Most voters approve of President Trump’s temporary halt to refugees and visitors from several Middle Eastern and African countries until the government can do a better job of keeping out individuals who are terrorist threats.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided.

This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on visitors from these seven countries.

These findings have changed little from August when 59% of voters agreed with Trump’s call for a temporary ban on immigration into the United States from “the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism” until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists.”

….Continue reading @ Rasmussen Reports

 

Super Bowl 50 Terrorism Plot? FBI Warns Of Security Threats, Lone Wolf Terrorism At Football Showdown

– IBT  |  Jan 2016

“As football fans count down to Super Bowl 50, federal authorities, including the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, are looking into security concerns at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California, NBC News reported Sunday. Officials investigated a series of incidents where fiber optic cables had been severed in California, treating them as a possible security risk for the Feb. 7 NFL championship game.

“Particularly with the rise in use by terrorist groups of the internet to inspire and recruit, we are concerned about the ‘self-radicalized’ actor(s) who could strike with little or no notice,” homeland security officials said in a report, as quoted by NBC news. Fiber optic cables have been repeatedly severed throughout California since the summer of 2015, stumping FBI investigators as to who is cutting them and why. Severed cables slow down internet service, financial transactions and even emergency calls and are treated as a potential preparation for terrorism, the Wall Street Journal reported in August 2015.

The threat of lone wolf terrorism has increased after a self-radicalized couple stormed an office Christmas party in San Bernardino, California, in December, opening fire on employees in an act that killed 14 and wounded many more. Authorities have not been able to connect the pair to any formal training in Syria with the Islamic State group or any other terror group, leading many investigators to believe the attack was a case of homegrown terrorism.

Terrorists who pledged allegiance to ISIS descended upon Paris two weeks before the San Bernardino massacre, slaughtering 130 people in locations across the city, at targets including a large stadium. The assault was the worst massacre on French soil since World War II, and it sparked fear in city residents around the world as it targeted cafes, bars and other nighttime gathering spots.

The FBI noted how among the Paris attacks was an attempt to bomb a big stadium, the Stade de France. The report said one potential security risk would be bars, parking lots or anywhere else fans congregate outside the Super Bowl stadium because they could not be as easily protected by police.”

…..Continue reading @ IBTimes

 

 

Sorry Would-Be Scholars, Trump’s Refugee Ban is Legal and Follows Example Set By Founders

– LawNewz

“Following a line of Supreme Court cases, English common law precedents, and international scholastic opinions, the famed Justice Frankfurter (yes, liberals, that liberal icon Justice Frankfurter), opined in that famous 1952 case:

“Accordingly, when this policy [of open immigration] changed and the political and lawmaking branch of this Government, the Congress, decided to restrict the right of immigration about seventy years ago [1882], this Court, thereupon and ever since, has recognized that the determination of a selective and exclusionary immigration policy was for the Congress, and not for the Judiciary.

The conditions for entry of every alien, the particular classes of aliens that shall be denied entry altogether, the basis for determining such classification, the right to terminate hospitality to aliens, the grounds on which such determination shall be based, have been recognized as matters solely for the responsibility of the Congress and wholly outside the power of this Court to control.” Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580 (1952).”

Thus Carter banned Iranians in 1980 and Obama banned Iraqis for a period of time in 2011, just as Reagan, Bush and Clinton exercised their alien exclusion authority at some point in time during their presidencies.

We may be a nation founded by immigrants, but we are also a country that has long strictly restricted which immigrants make up our nation.”

….Continue reading more @ LawNewz

 

New York Federal Judge Blocks Part of President’s ‘Refugee’ Executive Order | Jan 29, 2017

Judge Blocks Trump Order on Refugees Amid Chaos and Outcry Worldwide

– New York Times

 

“A federal judge in Brooklyn came to the aid of scores of refugees and others who were trapped at airports across the United States on Saturday after an executive order signed by President Trump, which sought to keep many foreigners from entering the country, led to chaotic scenes across the globe.

The judge’s ruling blocked part of the president’s actions, preventing the government from deporting some arrivals who found themselves ensnared by the presidential order. But it stopped short of letting them into the country or issuing a broader ruling on the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s actions.

The high-stakes legal case played out on Saturday amid global turmoil, as the executive order signed by the president slammed shut the borders of the United States for an Iranian scientist headed to a lab in Massachusetts, a Syrian refugee family headed to a new life in Ohio and countless others across the world.

The president’s order, enacted with the stroke of a pen at 4:42 p.m. Friday, suspended entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days, barred Syrian refugees indefinitely, and blocked entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The Department of Homeland Security said that the order also barred green card holders from those countries from re-entering the United States. In a briefing for reporters, White House officials said that green card holders from the seven affected countries who are outside the United States would need a case-by-case waiver to return.”

….Continue reading @ NY Times

 – Fine, a limited and very small part of President Trump’s executive order is blocked by a federal judge in New York. We need to be aware that this is more a media event than a legal one. It now gives the left wing echo chamber plenty of fake news to go on about for the next week. 

Many will be misled by their end of the echo chamber, ensuring a frothing of the base, but little else. 

It would be major news, if this federal order encourages a major effort to restrict the executive’s perogative and duty to enforce immigration law. This order is not it. /CJ

Federal Judge Grants Partial Block Of Trump Immigration Order

– ZeroHedge | Tyler Durden

“Symbolic war broke out between the Judicial and Executive branches shortly before 9pm on Saturday evening, when federal judge Ann Donnelly in the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn issued an emergency stay halting Trump’s executive order banning immigrants from seven mostly Muslim nations entering the US, and temporarily letting people who landed in U.S. with valid visa to remain on US territory, saying removing the refugees could cause “irreparable harm”.

However, while some media reports present the court ruling as a wholesale victory over Trump’s order, the stay only covers the airport detainees and those currently in transit, and it does not change the ban going forward.

What will disappoint civil rights advocates, is that this opinion only affects the small number of people who were in-transit when the order was issued, and arrived after it went into effect. The Constitution attaches to their status, and they cannot be held in violation of the Due Process Clause. The same analysis does not apply to aliens outside the United States.

We now look forward to Trump’s reaction to this act of defiance by a US Court which has partially – and painfully – voided his most controversial executive order to date, and whether the Supreme Court will be forced to opine on this most divisive of topics in the coming days. If anything, the risk to the latter may accelerate the prompt appointment of a conservative SCOTUS judge to fill the vacant Scalia spot.”

….Continue reading more @ ZeroHedge

 

IS THE TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER ON REFUGEES CONSTITUTIONAL?

– JonathanTurley.org

“Curiously, the order notes the 9-11 attacks but the order does not cover the countries that were the sources for those attackers, including Saudi Arabia and UAE.   I think that this order is a mistake and contradicts our values.  However, I do not agree with some of my colleagues at GW and other law schools that the order is clearly unconstitutional.  Courts are not supposed to rule on the merits of such laws but their legality.  I think that the existing precedent favors Trump.

he 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act contains section, 212(f) that gives sweeping authority on the exclusion of certain aliens:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Even President Jimmy Carter used such authority. Executive Order 12172 involves an order to force 50,000 Iranian students living in the United States report to an immigration office and face possible deportation. Thousands were deported.”

….Continue reading more @ JonathanTurley.org

Federal judge grants stay for those detained under Trump’s travel ban

– NY Post

“A Brooklyn federal judge took on President Trump Saturday night, staying deportations that could have immediately sent people from seven predominately Muslim countries back to where they came from.

An estimated 100 to 200 people had been detained at airports around the country when their planes landed Friday and Saturday.

Judge Ann Donnelly’s order applies to all of them, not only to those arriving within her immediate jurisdiction at JFK Airport.

An emergency hearing on the matter ended dramatically when ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt told Donnelly that at least one person at JFK was being put on a flight back to Syria at that moment.

The judge asked if the Trump administration could assure that the people about to be deported would not suffer irreparable harm.

Susan Riley, a civil lawyer who works in the Brooklyn US Attorney’s Office, said she couldn’t answer the question.

“This has unfolded with such speed that we haven’t had any opportunity to address any of the issues, the legal issues of the status of anyone who may be at the airport,” Riley said.

Donnelly then asked, “If they had come in two days ago we wouldn’t be here. Am I right?”

The judge noted that the government did not argue that the detainees posed any risk.

Gelernt said the feds had not given up the names of all the people who were detained around the country.

Still, he insisted the detainees posed no risk.

“It’s not as if these people weren’t vetted, they were just caught in transit,’’ he said. “They were in a horrible position.”

It was not clear how the feds would respond to the decision by Donnelly, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Barack Obama.

Donnelly first made news as a former Manhattan assistant district attorney in such high-profile cases as the successful prosecution of thieving former Tyco International Dennis Kozlowski.

“Ann Donnelly was a smart, tough, fair prosecutor,” said defense lawyer and former prosecutor’s office colleague Daniel Bibb.

“She had that same reputation as a state Supreme Court justice, and that reputation earned her her place on the district court bench,” he said.

The refugees will not be deported immediately, but may find themselves in government detention for several weeks at least.

Further proceedings are set for next month.

Two of the JFK detainees — both of whom had links to US forces in Iraq and were in danger of being killed if they were sent back — had already been sprung before the emergency hearing.

They were Hameed Khalid Darweesh and Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi.

When their lawyers asked an airport customs supervisor for help, they were told, “Mr. President. Call Mr. Trump,’’ they complained in court papers.

The detentions had been part of Trump’s effort to keep refugees from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen out of the country.

Going forward, travelers from those seven countries likely willstill be barred from boarding US-bound flights.

Trump’s ban stays in effect for 120 days.

In Philadelphia, two Syrian families living in Qatar were detained when they arrived and then sent back, relatives told NBC News.

More than a dozen were detained in Chicago.

Fifty people were detained at the Dallas-Forth Worth Airport.

Trump’s order sowed confusion around the wold as authorities rushed to comply.

The ACLU’s Jadwat said that when Trump signed the order, “there was no actual plan in place for how to implement it.”

The president strongly disagreed.

“It’s not a Muslim ban, but we’re totally prepared,” Trump said.

“It’s working out very nicely. You see it at the airports, you see it all over. It’s working very nicely.”

….Continue reading and see all the photos  @ NY Post

New York City Fights ICE and Federal Authorities over ‘Sanctuary’ Policy | Jan 28 2017

ICE Fights Back Against New York City’s Sanctuary Policy

– Daily Caller

“Immigration and Customs Enforcement is feuding with New York City’s stated policy of non-compliance with federal immigration detainers.

The detainers from ICE ask for local law enforcement to hold an illegal immigrant in custody until federal agents can retrieve the illegal alien. An ICE press release Friday said, “ICE arrests convicted Mexican national released from local custody after detainer was ignored.”

ICE officers arrested a Mexican national, Luis Alejandro Villegas, on Wednesday just weeks after he was released by New York Police Department officials who ignored an immigration detainer. Villegas was in local custody for driving while intoxicated, and he previously served five years in prison for armed robbery. He was deported back to Mexico in 2007 following his stint in prison.

“Villegas is a criminal alien who was released back into our New York communities, posing an increased and unnecessary risk to those who live in this great city,” Thomas R. Decker, New York field office director for enforcement and removal operations, said in a statement.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Wednesday calling for the federal government to stop providing funds to jurisdictions which don’t cooperate with immigration detainers. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has said he doesn’t plan to change policy following the executive order and has claimed the city has “solid ground for a legal challenge to the executive order should the occasion arise.”

New York City’s comptroller recently said that the Big Apple could lose an estimated $7 billion annually in federal funding if they do not change their “sanctuary” policy.”

….Continue reading @ Daily Caller

 

Is The Trump Executive Order On Refugees Constitutional?

– JonathanTurley.org

“Curiously, the order notes the 9-11 attacks but the order does not cover the countries that were the sources for those attackers, including Saudi Arabia and UAE.   I think that this order is a mistake and contradicts our values.  However, I do not agree with some of my colleagues at GW and other law schools that the order is clearly unconstitutional.  Courts are not supposed to rule on the merits of such laws but their legality.  I think that the existing precedent favors Trump.

First, this is not a religious ban. When it was first discussed on the campaign, it was described as a ban on Muslims.  This is not a religious ban. It certainly can be opposed as having that effect but there are a wide array of Muslim countries not covered by the ban and would not be impacted by the restrictions.  A court cannot in my view treat this order as carrying out a religious ban as it is currently written.

Second, the law largely suspends entry pending the creation of new vetting procedures.  That is based on a national security determination made by the President. Courts have generally deferred to such judgments.  A president’s authority is at its zenith on our borders. Hillary Clinton herself campaigned on carefully vetting refugees (though she favors increasing such entries). In  a November 2015 national security speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton said “So yes, we do need to be vigilant in screening and vetting any refugees from Syria, guided by the best judgment of our security professionals in close coordination with our allies and partners.”

Finally, there is precedent for limited entry from particular countries going back to some of the earliest periods in this country.  The earlier immigration laws include  the 1875 Page Act which focused on Asian immigrants and those believes to be engaged in prostitution or considered convicts in their native countries.  Then there was the infamous  1882 Chinese Exclusion Act.  Then there were other measures limiting immigration from particular areas like the  1906 “Gentleman’s Agreement” (Japanese aliens) and the or the 1917 Immigration Act (“Asiatic Barred Zone”).

In 1921 and 1924, Congress passed the “Quota Acts” limiting entry from disfavored countries.   of nations from whom no further immigrants would be accepted. In every case, immigration policy continued to develop as a series of widening, discriminatory exclusions.  It was not until 1965 that we broke from our long and troubling history is such discrimination.

However, The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act contains section, 212(f) that gives sweeping authority on the exclusion of certain aliens:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Even President Jimmy Carter used such authority. Executive Order 12172 involves an order to force 50,000 Iranian students living in the United States report to an immigration office and face possible deportation. Thousands were deported.”

….Continue reading more @ JonathanTurley.org

Recent History |  Nov 2015

After the Paris Bataclan Muslim Terror Attack

Amid furor in Washington over the admission of Syrian refugees, senators of both parties say that the easiest path for foreign terrorists to enter the United States is the visa waiver program.

Without visas, nationals from dozens of countries in Europe and elsewhere need only a passport to pass through U.S. customs at airports and other entry points, bypassing the screening process to which visa applicants are subjected.

“Twenty million people each year from 38 countries, including France and Belgium, use the visa waiver program,” said Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Terrorists could exploit the program, could go from France to Syria, as 2,000 fighters have done, come back to France, use the visa waiver program and, without any further scrutiny, come into the United States.”

The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Feinstein has introduced legislation to block visa waivers for foreign nationals who have traveled to Syria or Iraq in the last five years.

“They can still visit,” Feinstein said, “but they need a traditional visa – a process that includes an in-person interview at a U.S. embassy or consulate.”

Refugee Concerns

The bill is co-sponsored by Republican Senator Jeff Flake, who says fears about possible security risks posed by Syrian refugees are overblown.

“If you look at all the gaps in our security situation and the vulnerabilities we have, in my view the refugee program is well down that list [of concerns]. Visa waiver is near the top,” Flake said.

“We absolutely need to tighten up the visa waiver program,” said another Republican, Rob Portman. “There are 5,000 foreign fighters who are from countries with which we have a visa waiver program. It’s a huge problem.”

….Continue reading @ VOA News

Daily Mail Reporter Claims Fake Syrian Passport Fooled Expert

– Daily Mail UK

“Daily Mail reporter Nick Fagge told Fox News that he was able to get a fake Syrian passport good enough to fool a supposed “forgery expert” for just $2,000.

Fagge’s article on the experience caught the attention of Monday morning’s edition of Fox & Friends, where he appeared to discuss just how easy it apparently is to attain a Syrian passport — regardless of whether or not you’re actually a Syrian refugee. The reporter was able to obtain a passport, driving license and identity card for the price.

“When I bought the passport, I asked [the forger] who was buying them,” he said. “He told me, ‘people who wanted a better life, people who are pretending to by Syrians.’ But most worryingly, ‘members of ISIS,’ people who wanted to come to Europe to bring their evil war to us and kill people.”

Fagge later got in touch with a forgery expert in the German police. Both the driving license and the identity card were easily dismissed, but the passport was another matter.

“He spent quite a long time analyzing it. He said it was genuine. He said, ‘This is a real passport.’”

Concerns about possible ties between Syrian refugees and ISIS have been heightened following Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris after a Syrian passport was found on one of the attackers. In the United States, several state governors have denounced the White House’s current plan to accept refugees.”

….Continue reading @ Mediaite

 

Bernie says ‘climate change’ is the cause of global terrorism

– Youtube

Hillary’s “smart power” will bring peace in our time – empathize with our enemies

– Youtube

”Using eve

 

“”Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one’s enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.”                                                                                                    – Hillary Clinton

 

Pakistan Refugee in the Country Ten Months Commits Muslim Terror at Christmas | Dec 2016

12 Dead as Pakistani ‘Refugee’ Ploughs Truck Through Berlin Christmas Market

– Breitbart

“A large truck has stormed through a Christmas market in the German capital of Berlin killing 12 people and injuring many others. German press reports a 23-year old recent migrant has been arrested, and United States President-elect Donald Trump has called the attack part of a “global jihad”.

UPDATE 11:30 GMT — Following intelligence that European Christmas markets were being targeted by would-be Islamist killers, British police forces deployed concrete barriers to prevent the ingress of speeding vehicles and patrolled armed officers. Anti-gun activists on Twitter criticised the move, prompting at least one force to defend the move.”

….Continue reading @ Breitbart

12 Dead, 48 Injured After Pakistan-Born Refugee Rammed Truck Into Berlin Christmas Market

– ZeroHedge

“What is notable about this attack, and what may led to even more populist anger, is that as we reported last night, on November 21, the state department warned Americans travelling to Europe to be aware of possible terrorist attacks on Christmas markets.

We are confident Merkel will be asked why she didn’t give out a similar warning to her own citizens.

The Police have said that the first indications from the ongoing investigation suggest the truck crash was an attack on the Christmas market.”

…Continue reading more @ ZeroHedge